Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 425 posts

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#361

Post by icahnvalyou »

throw98987 wrote: post #360
rdslw wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy "creating a billion-dollar business". Ive read a Bloomberg story on the IPO and saw there two hilarious sequences "MongoDB has 4,300 paying customers. MongoDB employs 820 people in 29 offices" - that does not compute (for me) so I started analyzing their financial report (btw funny is nobody in whole HN discussion quoted numbers from the report so far, but a lot of 'im buying their stock' talks here). In…

How can one short it efficiently?

Most online brokers don't have lending inventory available yet. TD won't let me short.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#362

Post by darkr »

nagarjun wrote: post #332
munk-a wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they had done so by presenting a product that was picked up due to it's merit and continued to gain traction based on that then I'd be rather impressed. Instead the story of MongoDB seems to be how extremely well targeted marketing and sales can build a so-so product into a huge IPO, there have been performance comparisons showing it isn't even the best at what it does so this IPO is riding on the network effect o…

What would you consider to be a "top-notch" NoSQL database?

DynamoDB, Cassandra

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#363

Post by sigzero »

tribaal wrote: post #339
da_chicken wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RDBMS makes sense for most applications. Most applications store data that can be fit to the relational model. Most applications aren't big data or data mining OLAP. Most RDBMSs can do key-value stores very well now. Most applications also care more about consistency over availability, which is what RDBMSs do (CAP theorem). Many NoSQL data stores choose availability and partitioning and sacrifice consistency (i.e., "…

> Now, if you're running Reddit or Wikipedia or Facebook or HN... Wikipedia uses MariaDB (so, MySQL). https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers#Software

MongoDB is the MariaDB of the NoSQL world.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#364

Post by GenericsMotors »

sigzero wrote: post #359
GenericsMotors wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even minor things like picking a product name had impact. They get zero points for this. It pretty much reads as "Retard"DB in Portuguese, Spanish, and IIRC German.

Not that it is 100% reliable but I put "mongo" in Google translate for all three of those languages and it comes out "mongo". Unless mongo is "slang" in those languages.

It is slang, short for "mongoloide".

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mongo

Interesting this isn't the case with English.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#365

Post by eric-hu »

tytytytytytytyt wrote: post #69
cloverich wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of the bootcamp schools use mongo from what I remember. An interesting comparison would be what devs with 5+ years of experience prefer to use.

That's not "software developers", though. And how many people would that actually be, not most I'd think...

A friend of mine works in a commercial real estate consulting company. One of his former co-workers was non technical, but kept insisting they use Mongo for their projects. He believed it would automatically boost the performance of a system. I guess he thought of it like installing a turbocharger in a car.

I have no idea what his sources were for this, but it signals Mongo's marketing power to me if a non developer would become so avid about it.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#366

Post by nailer »

throw98987 wrote: post #360
rdslw wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy "creating a billion-dollar business". Ive read a Bloomberg story on the IPO and saw there two hilarious sequences "MongoDB has 4,300 paying customers. MongoDB employs 820 people in 29 offices" - that does not compute (for me) so I started analyzing their financial report (btw funny is nobody in whole HN discussion quoted numbers from the report so far, but a lot of 'im buying their stock' talks here). In…

How can one short it efficiently?

Outside the US, you can do OTC derivatives via Spread Betting. Eg, give me/take from me a pound for every point this stock moves for/against my bet. Most spread betting providers in the UK carry NASDAQ stocks.

Note the downside is unlimited when you short via spread betting. Eg, there's no maximum value of a stock, so you might get proper f'd.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#367

Post by austenallred »

rdslw wrote: post #343
shubhamjain wrote: post #22

MongoDB isn't usually seen favorably but everyone must admit that it's an unlikely success story that deserves admiration. Think about it. Bringing a database to the market with a completely different paradigm, growing it to the enterprise-production-ready level, and creating a billion-dollar business around is no small deal. Yes, they did ride the NoSQL zeitgeist but they survived when others had no major success. U…

I don't buy "creating a billion-dollar business". Ive read a Bloomberg story on the IPO and saw there two hilarious sequences "MongoDB has 4,300 paying customers. MongoDB employs 820 people in 29 offices" - that does not compute (for me) so I started analyzing their financial report (btw funny is nobody in whole HN discussion quoted numbers from the report so far, but a lot of 'im buying their stock' talks here). In…

Make sure to look at the revenue growth rate before you short (or encourage HN to do so). What happens if that growth rate continues for another year or two, and they have a standard growth multiple? You’ll lose your shirt.

It seems like you’re trying to value the company in a manner that doesn’t make sense for this stage of a company, and you could lose a hell of a lot of money.

For the uninitiated in the stock market: you shouldn’t really be shorting anything, especially not growth stocks, and abso-freaking-lutely not immediately following an IPO.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#368

Post by zimpenfish »

GenericsMotors wrote: post #364
sigzero wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that it is 100% reliable but I put "mongo" in Google translate for all three of those languages and it comes out "mongo". Unless mongo is "slang" in those languages.

It is slang, short for "mongoloide". https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mongo Interesting this isn't the case with English.

English would be "mong". Probably because we got lazy with our abusive terms in the 70s and 80s.

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/mong#English (Etymology 3)

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#369

Post by mason55 »

elgenie wrote: post #333
mason55 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are other reasons you might want a pop as opposed to squeezing every possible cent out of the IPO - For better or worse, a pop is seen as a successful IPO. A lot of the market is about expectations and if you have an "unsuccessful" IPO you are going to get good press. - Underwriters are selling to the same institutional investors over and over. They're going to promise those investors that there will be a rewar…

Both of those are meaningless to a company when compared to having 30% more money to devote to their projects. Because of lockups, the IPO pop is irrelevant to employees and most insiders, whose proceeds are usually determined by the stock's value six months from IPO. The first point amounts to one good press cycle. You can get that other ways and the lasting value of a single cycle of fluffed up good press based on…

> The second is entirely the underwriter's problem. A company only IPOs once; there's no reason for them to take a hit to help the underwriter and friends make money for no reason. The underwriter takes a cut and a fee regardless.

Think of it as an additional cost of underwriting just broken out in a weird way and it might be more palatable.

If you want a lot of interest in your IPO then you probably need underwriters with big institutional relationships. The underwriters with the best relationships are going to be the ones who help their clients get good returns. You're just paying for better underwriters by losing part of the pop instead of paying them fees directly.

Companies are free to go to smaller underwriters in exchange for an IPO price that's closer to what the underwriter thinks the market will bear. And yet most of them choose not to.

Given that almost every IPO has a pop, what do you think is most likely

* CEOs & VCs taking their companies public don't realize that they are leaving money on the table by underpricing the IPO. You have two groups of sophisticated finance people and the underwriting side always manages to fleece the company going public.

* There are structural reasons and incentives for creating an IPO pop

You can't even accuse people of trying to fleece the low-level employees and retail investors. The employees are locked up either way and whether you have a pop or not, by the time the shares reach the retail investors they're the same price either way.

Re: MongoDB shares jump more than 30% in $192M IPO

#370

Post by austenallred »

throw98987 wrote: post #360
rdslw wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't buy "creating a billion-dollar business". Ive read a Bloomberg story on the IPO and saw there two hilarious sequences "MongoDB has 4,300 paying customers. MongoDB employs 820 people in 29 offices" - that does not compute (for me) so I started analyzing their financial report (btw funny is nobody in whole HN discussion quoted numbers from the report so far, but a lot of 'im buying their stock' talks here). In…

How can one short it efficiently?

I mean this in the kindest way possible: If you don’t know the answer to that question, you shouldn’t be shorting anything. Especially not at IPO.
Post reply on HN